FastFreddy2

Well, the deed is done. Brexit has begun, and there is no turning back now. (Apparently.)

I can assure you, a couple of years ago my interest in TM on a scale of 1 to 10, would had a minus sign in front of it. Her previous record, was not good. Talked much, but delivered little (as is often the case with politicians) even as Home Secretary. However, if she only ever does one thing, it's done and I'm happy for her to be where she is because she got it done. And unlike previous PM's, when Sturgeon came calling looking for further inducements (money) to stop whining on about "independence", Sturgeon was sent away with nothing. Made good reading.

I was unaware TM owned OTK boots. Fair play, though I didn't much like the shape of the heel 'as photographed'. She is still a very plain looking woman with a taste for the avant garde in clothing style. She would seldom be hard to find in a crowd. I'm not really interested in her dress sense, although I would consider it novel. What I'm more concerned about, is her delivering what the general populace want. So far, she seems to be moving toward doing just that. Much to my surprise, I'm glad to say. As with millions of others, I am expecting news today, I never really thought would arrive. Interesting times.

You're obviously a fan ......

I was careful to word my response. I doubt you or anyone could show me paintings depicting men wearing 4 or 5 inch stiletto's. A boot with a heel to show off wealth (owner of horses) is one thing. A high fashion court shoe .... Overall, it's a one way street. When woman's fashion takes up something previously largely masculine, MEN don't go after it again. In that respect, trousers and jeans 'never left the building', but they are unisex, omnisex, or pansexual? [Tick box as appropriate. ]

I had to read up about that to understand it. "Apparently", Murdoch didn't see a need to change the headline even when the full story about the sinking (and loss of life) was known. Says a lot about the man really. As for the DM editorial profile, I think it's stuff of 'legend', and none of it good. I began reading it because of the pictures, my interest being glamorous women wearing high heels. (There is a thread I started here, with me having access to hundreds of images to be included - sometime.) But I have to say, with all the 2015 GE going on, the Referendum, Brexit, I am often motivated to comment. Sometimes on the picture editors ability to show us so many woman with no lower limbs, but 20 near identical photo's if a glimpse of cleavage is seen. I guess he'she used to work for The Sun newspaper? I remember Sarah Vine getting herself into a lot of hot water over the election of a new leader of the Conservative Party, with her husband's rather foolish route to gaining access to that position and the PM's job. Trying to defend the indefensible .... I wouldn't be surprised if that couple has 4 left feet between them.

I obviously missed the early edition, as I read the DM on-line. Even so, I had two thoughts when looking at this picture ..... Firstly, TM has shiny tights on, very luxurious I concluded. Then looking at Sturgeon, I decided no matter how desperate I might feel, that women is never going to seem attractive to me. For that matter, neither is Teresa May, though she have been attractive in her younger days. Sadly, I can't counter 10,000 years worth of DNA heritage that gives us all the 3 second 'flight or fight' urge. I suspect part of that DNA training is the (also) intellectually unconquerable thought about attractiveness. (Men vs women.) I've no defence. That said, I'm not married to a British MP (and sometime Government Minister) and I don't write for a national publication, where intellectual skill and writing ability are judged daily, not least because I'm getting paid to be judged. The more favourably so, the greater my remuneration of course. For a woman in her position to reduce the encounter of two successful women to the shape of their legs, is crass. Not verging on stupidity, but deeply buried in it. What was she thinking? Her husbands career is barely out of the toilet, was she trying to flush it again?

Boots haven't been 'taken over' by women. Some styles are more synonymous with womens fashion, but I would think more mens boots are sold globally than womens. Likewise trousers. Some more synonymous with womens styles ("slacks", capri pants, ski pants) but more sold for men. Even jeans ... Women probably own more pairs (more sold to women) than men, certainly in the Western world. More styles for women (look better on women too), but men still wear them. Men have never 'owned' high heels, not in the sense of 'high heel fashion shoes'. They are -generally- the realm of womens fashion garb, rather like a pencil skirt might be.

Mrs Freddy came up with one, I didn't really understand at first .... Trousers. Used by men, 'borrowed' (still) by women, but worn (still) by men. The reason I didn't get it, is that we don't see them as feminine attire, which is exactly why the answer is a winner. Truly, unisex. Is there a prize?

Scarves? Skin toner. But I would tend to agree. Once an item has been recognised as predominantly "ladies" attire, I can't think of one item that has crossed back, even half-way to become unisex. So much for "equality" of the sexes ....

And flares surely? Especially if you are into Northern Soul. (I've heard.)

Bell-bottomed trousers, aka bootcut aka 'flares'?

Now, that brings back memories.... "Hey, Miguel" I wonder if I have a photo?

Sold some jeans to a nice lady close to Brent Cross, which I delivered tonight, so didn't get as far as Westfield. Maybe next week.

There is a very slim chance I might be close enough to Westfield White City tonight, to go have a look at a pair my size. Reports from reviewers suggest they might fit quite well. There's still the £55 hurdle though....

I can do better. If my hair had been just a little bit curlier, when I grew a "beard" I could easily be mistaken for Peter Sutcliffe. If there was any doubt, a work colleague very kindly pointed it out to me as to remove that doubt. I remember it well. An older fellow ..... First 'pass' was something like .... "You remind me of someone....." A week later, "Peter Sutcliffe". If he had said Charles Manson, I wouldn't have been surprised either. I've no family in Yorkshire, and only an estranged Auntie (I hope) in Chicago so no claim to any family likeness. As I've grown older, there is less chance of this being possible, unless I wore a wig. What finally did for my 'designer stubble' look, was another colleague, this time a younger woman, telling me my half beard put years on me. Not allowed it to get past a running maximum of 5 days growth since. I too would like the opportunity to learn how to use what I know as a 'cut-throat' razor. Used to see them used all the time when I went to the barbers as a child. I always worried about 'slips' so never thought to get taught. The throat isn't well protected against mishaps after all.

I think it fair to describe fashion and fetish as two very distinct places on the 'dressing' scale. While some might not agree, "fashion" to me isn't only what is trending at the moment. It's about interpreting what is attractive for the wearer. For example (and I'm a great one for benchmarking my conclusions) the 'fashion bloggers' on social media are doing exactly that. Many aren't reporting about what people are wearing yesterday, nor maybe today, but throwing ideas into clothing assemblies that generate looks that might be worn tomorrow. Those with many followers, I assume to be those who predict - or assemble well, complete outfits that enhance both the clothing and the wearer. Successful bloggers might be described as 'trendsetters' along with stylists used in some of the better fashion mags. (I'm struggling to think of one, though the names I could of used 30 years ago are still around.) I think "we" might fall into the 'alternative' genre, rather than trendsetting, and are a long way off mainstream. Not least because our look, generally, doesn't get published anywhere to get pushed into a trend. I had thought I might 'out' myself on a morning TV show. I'm absolutely sure they'd welcome a man-wearing-heels in a fashion segment. But how to get Pandora back into the box after the show? A LOT of men do wear heels though. I must have sold getting on for 100 pairs over the years, and well over half of those went to men. (And I suspect some of the names I'm sending to, are the alter-ego names of those who like to dress as women.) It's some of the reason I don't understand why men and heels/boots are not more of a mainstream fashion item?

I hadn't meant to mean only legs. Though if ever challenged about my (now) naked or stubbly legs, I cite "cycling" and potential injury. Cuts and scraps are not nice when full of hair (as well as mud and grit). Though my legs get so hairy, there could be an issue with wind resistance. I've met quite a lot of the people who have joined here, or responded. I don't remember any of them having a beard, so we all might have experience or tips for shaving their face (and maybe legs). Mrs Freddy swears by an epilator for her legs. Has apparently thinned any leg hair, and has made keeping her legs hair free easier over the years. I am tempted to invest, but would prefer a less painful laser. Epilators probably work best, along with wax as they (apparently) go below the epidermis to tug out the hair. I've tried it, and shaving is much less of challenge on the pain front. I'm told it gets easier over time. If I'm only de-hairing my legs once or twice a year, I'm never going to get past that initial screaming encounter. As to face-hair, I almost never shave two days running. It's been some time since I needed to, and my face doesn't enjoy it. I try to help toughen it up with after-shave, but I tend to find that experience painful too. I like to think I'm not a wimp, but I'm not good on hurting myself unnecessarily.

So ..... I'm the only person on the forum who has any experience of shaving .... ?

I think I need to have a lie down ..... Waaaay too much excitement for one day ....

And I don't know that is as true as it used to be ... This: Is a range of "PVC" boots almost sold out, marketed/sold by (literally) a high street brand with a typical target age range of 18 to 35 year olds. With the ramping up of shiny leggings as normal street/day wear, what used to be fetish wear seems to be increasingly regarded as easy-care clothing that shows off a woman's shape. I haven't seen any girls wearing PVC OTK/thigh boots out during the day (nor had to deal with the potential consequences of a restraining order if I did), but I've certainly seen quite a few OTK boots at the shops during daylight hours. With all that said ... I would fully agree, were you to wear PVC boots with your PVC trousers, you would either be seen as into it as a fetish, or as an original punk rocker.

I think I've mentioned this before, but 21st Century "PVC" isn't directly comparable with the 1960's genuine PVC that you might be familiar with. (ie Rain macs and mini skirts.) These days "PVC" is used more as a description of a textured finish, 'high shine' as we see with the trousers further up the thread. Here is a skirt that looks to be made with the 'real' stuff. Perhaps it's a modern skirt, or a 'retro' (genuine 1960/1970's) skirt: Either way, it's a shockingly unattractive style, not improved by the slightly cardboard-stiff material. (Horrible!) Modern "PVC" I would expect to be a coated material, sitting on top of a slightly stretchy woven base material. Has the look of PVC but lends itself to shaping, both in how it's tailored, and in wearing. The pictures you saw of me recently, had me in outfits that looked like old school PVC but were coated materials that were really quite comfortable to wear, and windproof. I don't remember perspiration ever being a problem either. Here's another picture that was titled using words like 'retro' and PVC. It's certainly retro, and might be an original, though would PVC have survived 50 years? Works on Lucy because she has no hips, but again, "stiff".

It used to be easier in the "old days" when heel cups were more curved. Back then, it wasn't unusual to see the heel on a woman's foot with cuts/plasters/calluses dependant on how long they'd been wearing a new high heeled court shoe. These days, manufacturers use a more open cup that as you rightly suggest, allows the (foot) heel to leave the heel cup while walking. My solution, and I suspect it's the same for a lot of others wearing court shoes, is to wear a shoe that's half size smaller than ideal. It would also explain why so many women suffer with crippled feet through wearing a heel. Doesn't affect every woman, but I think a significant number. Two of my longstanding girlfriends who used to wear heels all the time, have feet so badly damaged they can barely walk properly. Neither can tolerate wearing a heeled shoe, though both would still like to.

Some pictures supporting the notion "OTK boots" covers every long style .... Both, very much "thigh" boots.

I think I might have the same shoe. In the photo's here with me wearing leggings, I'm pretty sure I have on that very shoe. Originally offered them by hh4evr1, I did donate a pair back that might have fitted him a little better. The ones I have fit me very well, but there is absolutely no sizing information on them at all, or I might chase up a second pair, or the same in a boot. The heel is a challenge, but my biggest difficulty is keeping the shoe on my feet when I walk. I don't know if it's true of everyone, but after a while my feet tend to mould into a high shoe,sometimes leaving space around the heel cup. Useful with boots, not so useful with courts. Good choice!